Survey based investigation into general practitioner referral patterns for spinal manipulative therapy.

BACKGROUND: In the UK Physiotherapy, Chiropractic and Osteopathy are all statutory regulated professions. Though guidelines have supported the use of Spinal Manipulative Therapy (SMT) for low back pain (LBP), General Practitioners (GP) referral patterns to the 3 registered professions that perform SMT are generally unknown. METHOD: A short questionnaire was designed and piloted. Demographic information, patient referral to SMT and the GPs own personal utilisation of SMT were obtained. 385 GP's were contacted representing approximately 20% of the GP's in Wales Autumn 2007. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION: 182 (50.8%) completed questionnaires were returned. Profile characteristics: 2/3 of respondents were male, 79% were 40 years old or older (statistically reflective of the total population of GPs in Wales at that time) and 62% had 20 years or less in practise. Personal use of SMT by GP's: 48 respondents had sought SMT treatment and a further 56% of those that had not previously sought SMT indicated that they would consider doing so. Patient referral to SMT by GP's: 131 respondents (72%) had referred patients to SMT and of those who had not a further 13% would consider referring. The general referral pattern and utilisation pattern was Physiotherapy: Osteopathy: Chiropractic. 21% who had never referred patients neither had, nor would consider it for themselves. A small subgroup appeared to manage personal choice differently from patient referral: 5 individuals who had not referred patients either had or would consider it for themselves and 23 of the group that would refer patients neither had nor would seek it for themselves. CONCLUSIONS: This limited investigation indicates that GP's do practise consistently with guidelines on back pain and utilise SMT as a care option. Although the main option for referral was physiotherapy, slightly over 40% of respondents who expressed a preference would refer to either osteopathy or chiropractic, or both in preference to physiotherapy. There was a small proportion that did not and would not refer patients for SMT regardless of personal use of SMT; these suggested use of acupuncture. Further investigation is needed to determine the alternatives to SMT offered to patients and the decision-making criteria for patient referral to subtypes of SMT practitioner.

A case report of an uncommon cause of cauda equina symptoms.

OBJECTIVE: This case report discusses a patient who presented with right-sided buttock pain of apparently uncomplicated mechanical origin that was eventually diagnosed as a primary Ewing sarcoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor of the sacrum. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 32-year-old male full-time student presented for care with right-sided buttock pain. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: After examination, the patient was referred to his general practitioner for urgent magnetic resonance imaging, the report revealed no explanation for the presenting symptoms. After further imaging and biopsy, an eventual diagnosis of Ewing sarcoma/primitive neuroectodermal tumor was reached. The patient died 12 months later. CONCLUSION: This case highlights a nondiscal cause for cauda equina symptoms. It emphasizes potential diagnostic complexities that may present due to preconceptions based upon the probability of symptoms being related to a specific disease process.

Cerebrovascular accident without chiropractic manipulation: a case report.

OBJECTIVE: To discuss the case of a patient with chronic headache. Although not in severe pain at time of consultation, signs and symptoms raised concern. The patient later had a cerebrovascular accident. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 49-year-old man with non-traumatic chronic episodic head and neck pain presented for care. Examination and plain film radiographs were unremarkable, suggesting a mechanical origin for the symptoms; however, information in the case history raised concerns. INTERVENTION AND OUTCOME: The patient was examined and not manipulated by the doctor of chiropractic but referred back to his general practitioner for a second opinion. The following week, the patient was admitted to hospital having had a cerebrovascular accident. CONCLUSION: The possible indication of the prodrome to a stroke may lie in the case history rather than the examination findings and provocative testing.